Is it possible with our new offensive strategy that Ben starts as the PG? When you are pushing the ball up the court the necessity for a true PG is diminished. You need 2 maybe three guys who can put the ball on the floor and put pressure on the defense. Ben, Rip and Tay can give you that.

The question I have is the second unit. Do you let Will take the back up minutes at the PG spot and move Stuck to the SG spot with the second unit. I guess it all depends on how they see Will fitting in with the team.

I see two options:
#1 - Split the minutes between the four of them and give Stuck and Will the back up minutes as shown above.

#2 - Reduce Wills minutes and still start Ben and Rip. Bring Stuck in early as the PG and leave in the hot hand between Rip and Ben. Rotate the 3 of them with Stuck and Ben running point and Ben and Rip playing the 2.

I just don't think the need for a true PG is mandatory if you rebunding and pushing the ball up the floor. With chemistry you can actually get the ball from one end to the other without ever dribbling it.

Is it possible with our new offensive strategy that Ben starts as the PG? When you are pushing the ball up the court the necessity for a true PG is diminished. You need 2 maybe three guys who can put the ball on the floor and put pressure on the defense. Ben, Rip and Tay can give you that.

The question I have is the second unit. Do you let Will take the back up minutes at the PG spot and move Stuck to the SG spot with the second unit. I guess it all depends on how they see Will fitting in with the team.

I see two options:
#1 - Split the minutes between the four of them and give Stuck and Will the back up minutes as shown above.

#2 - Reduce Wills minutes and still start Ben and Rip. Bring Stuck in early as the PG and leave in the hot hand between Rip and Ben. Rotate the 3 of them with Stuck and Ben running point and Ben and Rip playing the 2.

I just don't think the need for a true PG is mandatory if you rebunding and pushing the ball up the floor. With chemistry you can actually get the ball from one end to the other without ever dribbling it.

Click to expand...

You can win some games with that tactic,but not a championship or be a playoffs team.If our choach would use the PO or the Triangle Offense then it's ok for Ben to be a PG,becouse PO and Triangle Offense doesn't need a true PG,but otherwise there is no future in Ben being a PG.

#2 - Reduce Wills minutes and still start Ben and Rip. Bring Stuck in early as the PG and leave in the hot hand between Rip and Ben. Rotate the 3 of them with Stuck and Ben running point and Ben and Rip playing the 2.

Click to expand...

I see this as the most likely scenario. Bynum is going to find himself the odd man out (barring injuries).

Ben Gordon at PG in any system is a quick way to lose games. He has PG size, he does not have PG game. He's just a small SG.

Click to expand...

First of all, welcome to the forum Jay.

My question is, why you say this so authoritatively? Are you saying this because you've watched him play PG and screw it up, or is it because he's never played PG in the NBA and you assume that he'll fail if he attempts? I'm going to reserve judgment until I see him try and fail. If we end up retaining Rip, which seems to be the case, I'm pretty certain that we'll see BG running the point sometime this season to provide sufficient minutes for Rip and BG.

If he can do even a mediocre job at the 1, BG+Rip backcourt can prove to be much better than Stuckey+Rip backcourt. Gordon can:

slash better than Stuckey

finish better than Stuckey

shoot better than Stuckey

He'll attract defenders a lot more than Stuckey. If he can find the open man consistently, he can become a good option at the 1. Nobody's going to dare him to shoot like teams did to Stuckey, I can tell you that.

Last season, the guy averaged 3.4 assists playing the role of a finisher (Stuckey averaged 4.9). So, if he's willing to give it a shot at PG, I'd be happy to see BG-Rip as the starting backcourt.

He'll attract defenders a lot more than Stuckey. If he can find the open man consistently, he can become a good option at the 1. Nobody's going to dare him to shoot like teams did to Stuckey, I can tell you that.

Last season, the guy averaged 3.4 assists playing the role of a finisher (Stuckey averaged 4.9). So, if he's willing to give it a shot at PG, I'd be happy to see BG-Rip as the starting backcourt.

Click to expand...

Gordon does not do either of the first two things better than Stuckey. He shot 50.8% on shots at the basket vs. an even 50% for Stuckey. But Stuckey takes more than twice as many shots in the paint than Gordon does (42% vs. 20%).

Gordon is obviously a better shooter and scorer than Stuckey, but to say he's a better slasher/finisher than him is disingenuous... he simply isn't.

My question is, why you say this so authoritatively? Are you saying this because you've watched him play PG and screw it up, or is it because he's never played PG in the NBA and you assume that he'll fail if he attempts? I'm going to reserve judgment until I see him try and fail. If we end up retaining Rip, which seems to be the case, I'm pretty certain that we'll see BG running the point sometime this season to provide sufficient minutes for Rip and BG.

Click to expand...

Thank you.

From watching him play since he got into the league, interacting with Bulls fans, and reading scouting reports. Ben Gordon can, even though I'm not a fan of it, play PG for short spurts. But he is definitely far from a full time PG. It's just not his game, he's a deadly shooter/scorer, not a setup guy. The only reason people entertain the idea of him playing PG is his size, it has almost nothing to do with his game. He's amazing in a 6th man role, and can be a solid starter, but not in the same backcourt with Rip. Their games just don't mesh. As mediocre as Stuckey can be finding Rip off curls, he's still a better option at point guard than Gordon.

The ceiling for this team is honestly a playoff berth and challenging a team in the 1st round a la the 09 Bulls. Might as well let Stuckey get his first year as a full time PG of a stable team. It's his third year. We'll know after this season whether or not he can actually be the PG of the future. I think Gordon's career has already proved he's not likely to ever succeed in that position, nor would anyone really perscribe it as a long term solution for the Pistons.

So, Rip had the 2nd best shooting percentage on the team in the paint, only behind Maxiell.

Maybe Rip's finishes just don't look as impressive as some of the shorter guards because he doesn't need to do anything fancy.

Click to expand...

Yeah, but only 15% of his shot attempts came in the paint... and he gets blocked 15% of the time (the same % as Stuckey for those complaining about him getting blocked). The vast majority of layups Hamilton are taking are wide open bunnies. You'd still have to say he's one of the weaker finishers on the team.

Yeah, but only 15% of his shot attempts came in the paint... and he gets blocked 15% of the time (the same % as Stuckey for those complaining about him getting blocked). The vast majority of layups Hamilton are taking are wide open bunnies. You'd still have to say he's one of the weaker finishers on the team.

Click to expand...

Whatever dude! Give Rip some props! On last years team that was a very difficult title to obatain!

Yeah, but only 15% of his shot attempts came in the paint... and he gets blocked 15% of the time (the same % as Stuckey for those complaining about him getting blocked). The vast majority of layups Hamilton are taking are wide open bunnies. You'd still have to say he's one of the weaker finishers on the team.

Click to expand...

That means that on shots in the paint where they don't get blocked, Rip shoots 80% and Stuckey shoots 65%.

That means that on shots in the paint where they don't get blocked, Rip shoots 80% and Stuckey shoots 65%.

Click to expand...

Hamilton isn't a better finisher than Stuckey - it's not even close actually. Stats do lie from time to time. Anyone with eyes can see that he is one of the weaker finishers on the team (him and Prince are battling for that spot).

Hamilton isn't a better finisher than Stuckey - it's not even close actually. Stats do lie from time to time. Anyone with eyes can see that he is one of the weaker finishers on the team (him and Prince are battling for that spot).

Click to expand...

Rip's finishing percentage in the paint is approaching .200 higher than Stuckey's. Shaq's is only .120 higher than Kwame Brown's for comparison. We are talking a huge gulf here that must be explainable by something. My explanations are that 1) Rip is taller and therefore his finishes look less impressive, 2) Rip slashes more without the ball and gets better opportunities, and 3) the stat keepers have mistakenly been counting all of Stuckey's hard passes off the backboard as shot attempts.

Stuckey's finishing rate inside the paint (.483) is similar to Rip's conversion rate on jump shots outside the paint (.448). That's not good.

I think the stats and maybe the difference between the two are different stories...

Rip finishes at a high rate when he goes, but almost all of his attempts are on fast breaks which are going to be basically bunnies that I will hit for a high percentage at, where Stuckey is driving to the basic against a set defense, so the stats really aren't fair to either in comparing them, its apple to oranges.

Who do I want finishing a break? Rip every time.... who would i rather having the ball at the top of the key and taking it to the hole, Stuckey is my pick in that case.